Search This Blog

A blog that tackles issues on basic education (in the Philippines and the United States) including early childhood education, the teaching profession, math and science education, medium of instruction, poverty, and the role of research and higher education.

Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

Copying from Educational Systems Abroad

"A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing." That is why scientific work requires identification and control of every variable that may affect the outcomes being measured or observed. Establishing causation requires much more than just discovering a correlation. Ignoring these rules can easily lead to conclusions being drawn without the proper basis. It is very tempting to find a "smoking gun" that explains what is sought. The intentions are often good, to copy what seems to be working. Not covering all bases, however, only leads to failure especially when important points are missed. Some countries are doing much better in international exams on mathematics so it is only reasonable to look at these countries, learn from them, and transfer the good things about their system to ours. An example of such thinking is illustrated by a piece published several months ago in the New York Times. It is an article by Elizabeth Green, "Why Do Americans Stink at Math?". The following is an excerpt:

"...Instead of having students memorize and then practice endless lists of equations — which Takahashi remembered from his own days in school — Matsuyama taught his college students to encourage passionate discussions among children so they would come to uncover math’s procedures, properties and proofs for themselves. One day, for example, the young students would derive the formula for finding the area of a rectangle; the next, they would use what they learned to do the same for parallelograms. Taught this new way, math itself seemed transformed. It was not dull misery but challenging, stimulating and even fun...."

Green basically attributes the success of Japanese schools in teaching math on a constructivist pedagogy and then suggests that the reason why American schools are not successful is the lack of training of teachers on how to implement effectively these lessons. Tom Loveless has an article in Brookings that debunk Green's assertion. Loveless writes:

"The July 27, 2014 edition of the New York Times Sunday Magazine featured an article by Elizabeth Green entitled “Why Do Americans Stink at Math?” In this blog post, I identify six myths promulgated in that article. Let me be clear at the outset. I am an admirer of Elizabeth Green’s journalism and am sympathetic to the idea that improving teaching would raise American math achievement. But this article is completely off base. Its most glaring mistake is giving the impression that a particular approach to mathematics instruction—referred to over the past half-century as “progressive,” “constructivist,” “discovery,” or “inquiry-based”—is the answer to improving mathematics learning in the U.S. That belief is not supported by evidence...."

One evidence that Loveless cites is the following:

Teachers’ Reports on How Often They Ask Students to Do Reasoning Tasks

The above clearly shows that the difference between American and Japanese students of about 100 points is maintained across the board. It does not matter whether a student receives a “progressive,” “constructivist,” “discovery,” or “inquiry-based” instruction. And among Japanese students, having more lessons that require reasoning tasks leads to only small differences. Another point that Loveless raises is the shadow education in Japan called juku. The Economist had an article on juku several years ago:

These "cramming schools" in Japan, as Loveless is suggesting, may be a significant factor behind the difference between the performance of Japanese and American students:

"...An alternative hypothesis to Green’s story is this: perhaps because of jukus Japanese teachers can take their students’ fluency with mathematical procedures for granted and focus lessons on problem solving and conceptual understanding. American teachers, on the other hand, must teach procedural fluency or it is not taught at all...."

The scope of shadow education in Asian countries is vast, capturing the majority of all students. The statistics above must give pause to anyone claiming that the success in schools in these countries may be emulated by simply copying their curriculum and pedagogy. That would not be accurate at all if shadow education, which is significant, is ignored. Ignoring shadow education means dismissing rote approaches to learning. That would be a huge mistake....

People have strong opinions about almost anything and the issue of education is no exception. How these opinions have been formed needs to be examined. This is what good research does. It informs and guides. A myriad of factors influence education and oftentimes, these factors are not independent from each other. Factors interact, sometimes these add, and other times, these subtract. General notions therefore need to be carefully drawn. Writing articles on education can also be quite challenging. When problems in basic education involve an inability to think critically, it is difficult to reach the audience and convey the correct message. Oftentimes, sarcasm is lost so such style of writing needs to be avoided. For people who are convinced of their wisdom and understanding of how education works, profound messages from basic research can be often easily lost.

There is information to be gained from data. Tests in schools can be informative. Scores of students provide a quick glimpse of the current state of education. Thus, it is useful to have these numbers. These numbers may not tell everything in detail with high accuracy. Nevertheless, test results allow for a useful perspective. The National Achievement Test administered by the Department of Education (DepEd) in the Philippines, a set of standardized tests addressing the major subjects taught in school, is an example. These tests are given to Grade 3 where students are assessed in both English and Filipino (These two subjects comprise two thirds of the exam) and Math and Science (These two account for the remaining one third). A different set of tests is given to Grade 6 pupils where each of the following 5 subjects is assigned 40 items: (Science, Math, English, Filipino and Social Studies). Another set is administered to fourth year high school students (This is currently the last year…

"Bear in mind that the wonderful things you learn in your schools are the work of many generations, produced by enthusiastic effort and infinite labor in every country of the world. All this is put into your hands as your inheritance in order that you may receive it, honor it, add to it, and one day faithfully hand it to your children. Thus do we mortals achieve immortality in the permanent things which we create in common." - Albert Einstein

Angel C. de Dios, Ph.D., is currently an associate professor of chemistry at Georgetown University. At Georgetown, he has been teaching General Chemistry since 1995 in addition to graduate courses in molecular spectroscopy and quantum chemistry. His research interests include nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, protein structure determination, anti-malarial drugs, and math and science education. He was a recipient of a CAREER Award from the National Science Foundation and the Georgetown College Dean’s Award for Excellence in Teaching. A member of PAASE (Philippine American Academy of Science and Engineering), he helped the residents of Paete, Laguna incorporate computers and the Internet into their public schools.